There should be a hackathon/kickstarter to get these cams to a low enough price where every officer in the country is wearing one, with no redaction. Seriously, a beagle board black costs $45; a camera and associated housing, battery, and software should not run the price over $1500-$2000, as Taser et. al. are charging.
The 'problem' they are trying to solve in this article, where open records requests mean that all such video is public -- makes it clear that what you are asking for is basically universal surveillance of everyone, available to everyone.
Which, of course, is where we seem to be headed anyway, and I think a significant portion of the audience on HN has no problem with it or is in favor of it.
What we have in our world today is closer to universal surveillance of everyone, available to the few. The few, of which we know to due to the declining information asymmetry over our collective human history, are just as susceptible to all the things that make us human.
The reasons those on here give is along the lines of: because HIPAA, because it may be embarrassing for me if I get caught on video in some compromising way, because I might not get that job/promotion/etc (which seem to not be the ones we hear parroted in the news i.e. terrorism, to justify current asymmetries, not to mention no questioning of the utility of a job done by people which people seem to implicitly equate to be the only way resources can be allocated to people in any system).
I have yet to see those then go on to acknowledge in their plausible theoretical scenarios (that probably already happen to some degree without [sous]surveillance available to all easily) that because I may think I was wrongly looked over/scrutinized, what would stop me from then doing the same to those who would wield such over me in those same situations or anyone else?
I can see why it can be distressing if one is convinced that the way one grows up, is normalized to, generally reinforced by their society at large (and maybe less so as time goes by as society…changes) and finds solace in such way of being, figures that is the way the world must be. The unswaddled babies and young children uploaded to internet by their parents (and their parents friends and relatives) without any say, will probably wonder why all the old folks of their time care much when all they have known will be what is so foreign us today.
So... let's say I know an ambulance responded to your house two weeks ago, in the middle of the night, and I want to know why (for... reasons...). I can't go as the EMS agency, or the hospital, as HIPAA prevents them from releasing any information. However... If I know a cop was there, then I can leverage the fact that the video his chest recorded is a matter of public record and find out for myself.
Wouldn't you want that video redacted in that case? There are plenty of other scenarios I can think of where redaction is very appropriate.
Comments
There should be a hackathon/kickstarter to get these cams to a low enough price where every officer in the country is wearing one, with no redaction. Seriously, a beagle board black costs $45; a camera and associated housing, battery, and software should not run the price over $1500-$2000, as Taser et. al. are charging.
The 'problem' they are trying to solve in this article, where open records requests mean that all such video is public -- makes it clear that what you are asking for is basically universal surveillance of everyone, available to everyone.
Which, of course, is where we seem to be headed anyway, and I think a significant portion of the audience on HN has no problem with it or is in favor of it.
I think it's distressing.
What we have in our world today is closer to universal surveillance of everyone, available to the few. The few, of which we know to due to the declining information asymmetry over our collective human history, are just as susceptible to all the things that make us human.
The reasons those on here give is along the lines of: because HIPAA, because it may be embarrassing for me if I get caught on video in some compromising way, because I might not get that job/promotion/etc (which seem to not be the ones we hear parroted in the news i.e. terrorism, to justify current asymmetries, not to mention no questioning of the utility of a job done by people which people seem to implicitly equate to be the only way resources can be allocated to people in any system).
I have yet to see those then go on to acknowledge in their plausible theoretical scenarios (that probably already happen to some degree without [sous]surveillance available to all easily) that because I may think I was wrongly looked over/scrutinized, what would stop me from then doing the same to those who would wield such over me in those same situations or anyone else?
I can see why it can be distressing if one is convinced that the way one grows up, is normalized to, generally reinforced by their society at large (and maybe less so as time goes by as society…changes) and finds solace in such way of being, figures that is the way the world must be. The unswaddled babies and young children uploaded to internet by their parents (and their parents friends and relatives) without any say, will probably wonder why all the old folks of their time care much when all they have known will be what is so foreign us today.
So... let's say I know an ambulance responded to your house two weeks ago, in the middle of the night, and I want to know why (for... reasons...). I can't go as the EMS agency, or the hospital, as HIPAA prevents them from releasing any information. However... If I know a cop was there, then I can leverage the fact that the video his chest recorded is a matter of public record and find out for myself.
Wouldn't you want that video redacted in that case? There are plenty of other scenarios I can think of where redaction is very appropriate.